On Wednesday evening we held a meeting for Langham Road residents who had concerns regarding the bend on Langham Road. We had a brilliant turn out, from both residents new to the process and old hands, and were able to discuss a range of issues. We had some very positive debates and many good points came out during the evening. We discussed a variety of options to potentially further slow traffic on the bend, including painting a pattern on the road using anti-skid paint, providing ‘passing place’ bays on either side of the road, installing a flashing ’30mph’ sign, installing an additional raised table, a block work strip, or writing slow across the road.

As became apparent on Wednesday night, and throughout the whole process, we are constrained by the different wants, needs, and priorities of residents. We also have a limited budget, which we have already stretched to the absolute maximum. As the design currently stands – and has been discussed in depth over the past few months – we expect traffic speed to be satisfactorily reduced on the bend in Langham Road due to the variety of measures proposed. In particular, the two raised tables that sit either side of the bend, which will reduce speed in the approach to the bend.

Average speeds down Langham Road have been recorded at 32mph. By using a formula in Manual for Streets (published by the Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation) it is possible to ascertain speed reduction resulting from a bend in the road. Based on the bend radius on Langham Road it can be worked out that there is an approximate 4mph speed reduction. Therefore, as discussed last night, the bend itself reduces the speed of vehicles.

The Department for Transport (DofT) has released road traffic guidance on traffic calming. Their studies have shown that where raised tables/flat top/bump speed features have been installed average vehicle flow reductions of 20% can be expected. The Department for Transport has also studied the impact of raised tables/flat top/bump speed features when placed at various distances. Along Langham Road the features are placed on the designs between 60m-100m apart. The DofT’s findings show that we can expect the following:

For features 100m apart the average speed of vehicles traveling between the two points will drop from 30mph average speed to 22mph.

For features 60m apart the average speed of vehicles traveling between the two points will drop from 30mph average speed to 19mph.

Therefore, when taking into account the speed reduction imposed by the radius of the bend itself (4mph) and the expected reduction of average vehicle speed in the approach to the bend, from both directions, we expect that traffic speed will be considerably reduced on the bend.

The various suggestions discussed on Wednesday evening may or may not have a further impact on the speed of vehicles. Residents vary in their enthusiasm for loosing parking to facilitate ‘passing places’, for the application of large ‘slow’ signs painted on the road, and anti-skid paint which has a limited lifetime. At this late stage of the design process, where the budget has been filled and indeed already stretched, we cannot afford to install an additional feature on Langham Road – which does already have six features along its length and the project as a whole must be taken into consideration. Furthermore, taking into account the above statistics, we believe the current design will prove effective in slowing traffic on Langham Road, including on the bend itself.

Therefore, we propose to move ahead with a suggestion mentioned during the Wednesday meeting – to leave the designs as they are and for residents to monitor the success of the project upon completion. Over the months following construction residents are best placed to judge the effectiveness and whether further remedies are required. This is an integral part of the DIY Streets process and we will be providing residents with the necessary information and guidance in the coming months.

Residents who live on the bend will establish a dialogue for the future with Haringey Council by submitting a letter informing them that they will monitor the success of the project on the Langham bend in the months following completion.

Thank you to all who attended meeting. It was intersting to see that all new attendances including myself all expressed their view that they wanted a one way system.Although suggestions were made as stated above I disagree strongly with the final comment that it was suggested or agreed “to leave the designs as they are and for residents to monitor the success of the project upon completion” I therefore call all residents to write directly to John Mcqueen with their views concerning the designs and what they feel should be done.

Just to clarify – I am not saying that it was ‘suggested or agreed’ on the night. I am putting it forward as a proposal based on the comment being raised at the meeting. In response to a one way system please see my response to the comment below. Thanks.

Approx 16 residents came to the meeting on Langham Road Bend last Weds.
20MPH?
We all felt that crashes would still happen on the bend. It would be ‘great’ to have a 20 mph speed limit but Sustrans say this is not possible.. can we have the reason on the blog?
ONE WAY SYSTEM?
Over half the residents at the meeting kept asking why a ‘One Way System’ was not an option? Ben told us it was considered over a year ago at early consultations but many residents on Langham were apparently unaware of this, (unfortunately) and so were not able to voice their views in this vote. Many residents would like the council to now consider this as an option again and we would welcome other comments about this. A suggestion would be that it would only effect Carlingford down to Waldeck and Waldeck up Langham Road to Langham Parade/Cresent. It is a long term answer to consider now we know what the final design plans are but it is at present a suggestion and would need further consultation.
LETTER
Langham residents will be writing to the council and if you would like to be included in this please ask Ben to pass your details on to us in the next week.

20mph zone: This project has never been about establishing a 20mph zone in the neighbourhood. An official 20mph zone requires expensive blanket measures to be installed across the entire area (usually speed bumps) to ensure it is physically impossible for any vehicle to go over 20mph at any point within the zone. We believe the designs proposed effectively reduce speed at important the most important points in the neighbourhood, including the bend on Langham Road, Carlingford/Stanmore juntion, Stanmore/Waldeck junction, and Mannock/Downhills junction. This design improves the asthetic of the area while also encouraging drivers to drive with more consideration.

One Way System: This option – along with other restricted access solutions – was discussed at the beginning of the project and dismissed by residents. There are several issues with a one way system. The first is that such systems often result in higher vehicle speed since drivers do not have to worry about oncoming traffic. This is often offset with the roll out of a comprehensive system of speed bumps – which have proved unpopular with residents and are also very expensive. A one-way system is also often used to increase road capacity for vehicles passing through the area, which is clearly not a outcome we are hoping to achieve. There is additionally the added inconvinience for residents resulting from a one way system.

As has been discussed at length over the past months – this DIY Streets project provides a foundation to building a safer, better connected, and pedestrian/cycle friendly neighbourhood. It is not a golden ticket to solving every traffic related problem that currently exists. Having said that, the project has taken a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the problems and, together with residents, we have come up with a set of designs that will significantly change the vehicle dominated dynamic of the neighbourhood. Moving forward, the area could further benefit from becoming a 20mph zone at some point in the future and this project makes that possible.

As stated in the above comment – please register your interest with me with regard to assisting the council with monitoring the project upon completion, including the bend on Langham Road.

What about a ‘one way street’ not system? If you allowed traffic one way from ‘Langham Parade to the junction of Waldeck on top part of Langham Road’ – this might not constitute a one way system but a one way section of road. It would still need one more table to stop over 30 mphspeeding but
it could be a long term solution that the residents of this part of Langham Road are looking for. I accept the money pot is empty at present but sometimes money can be found from other pots within councils budgets, departments in future .. it has been known!
The changes that we are discussing, add to the final designs choices because until you finalised a design you cannot see the overall picture of how it will indeed work. Residents of Langham believe that on closer analysis of the designs ( which required good eyesight! as designs text tiny in places ), now would be the time to push for consideration of this rather than later after Sustrans has gone.
Could Sustrans put a vote up on the blog for support for this Langham Road Bend One way Street?

– Making Langham Road one way would make no difference to vehicle speed other than to potentially raise it.
– There is no money within this budget – or any other transport budget – to fund the construction of an additional raised table at this time.
– On this blog post (see above) there is significant detail as to why we expect traffic to be slowed on the bend of Langham Road.
– The designs were available to view on A0 boards at meetings, were attached to the community noticeboard and on the blog (which you can zoom in on and see very clearly).
– It is too late in the process to have an online vote regarding the wider designs for the project – the consultation and design process has already taken 14 months. All meetings were widely advertised and promoted throughout the neighbourhood.
– If at this late stage you are still concerned then – as discussed at the meeting on the bend – we can potentially consider some low cost interventions, including applying anti-skid paint or a thermo plastic image to the road surface.

Ben would you agree that I asked for a meeting back in July August for Langham Road Speeding?
Do you recall that you said that “it was not possible as no time and money for discussion about every traffic reducing speed intersection in this consultation. ” therefore no ‘On The Street’ meeting took place apart from Hay day July, which was so important to residents of the Waldeck Junction /Stanmore Road, many of which expressed that they knew nothing of the changes until that public day.
It took until October for agreement by Sustran for the Langham Road bend meeting.This was due to pressure from a number of residents and allowed for the public discussion with residents about their road in their road. It seems this meeting was too much feedback- too late ?
Question
Could you tell the residents when the vote for One way system was rejected and how it was done. It may help new people to understand how the process was consulted and works in terms of voting.

Early on in the design process – at one of the community design meetings held in the Church Hall – we asked residents to vote on whether they favoured a ‘measure approach’ (raised tables, etc) or restricted access approach (one way, no right turn etc). Residents present at the meeting (which was advertised via newsletter, posters, and emails gathered at earlier meetings) discussed the options at length and voted overwealmingly in favor of a ‘measure approach to tackling the traffic related problems in the neighbourhood.

I confirm that you did ask for a general Langham meeting in July – however, at the time, we did not have the capacity to hold seperate meetings for each intervention especially since each feature had been discussed and debated on at length during design meetings. The straw bale day was held to showcase the final design feature for Stanmore/Waldeck and the project in general since it was most suitable for the straw bale representation. The majority of attendees had been part of the design process and we also welcomed some new faces.

The reason I agreed to hold a meeting in October on Langham Road was because that same month you had sent me an email specifically expressing a concern that traffic would still approach the bend too quickly. I informed you that the final interventions and designs had been confirmed. I explained why we felt the designs that we had all worked through would prove effective in slowing traffic on the bend. I also said that we might be able to consider some low cost interventions – such as painting the road.

The designs for the neighbourhood, including Langham Road, have been formulated over the past few months – actively engaged residents, such as yourself, have helped Sustrans and the council balance the needs of a whole neighbourhood under strict time and financial constraints. We had to work within a strict programme and take into consideration the needs of all the streets in the neighbourhood. We believe the designs that were first showcased back in July are going to prove effective in slowing traffic in the most important areas.

If residents living on the bend wish to consider the options of painting an image/pattern on the road or applying ‘Slow’ on the approach to the bend – we can consider that and work through a solution. Otherwise, we need to press ahead with the final designs.

Thanks Ben for this clarification but I did ask in September aswell!
I sent a concerned email to you 7th September because another resident was concerned too and email me and you.
Can you confirm that I asked again in September for a meeting and you replied it was not possible.
Finally a meeting was organised in October when you were back from your leave and we asked again due to more residents asking.
I think its is important that it is on record that I have tried very hard to get this meeting before the end of design consultation and when I did it was too late.

I did recieve your email on 7th Sept – it was regarding a meeting about the design of the break point and not its precise location. The other resident who emailed me on that day wanted to ensure that a breakpoint of some description would remain in place and not be withdrawn. In October I recieved your email (along with one from a neighbour further along Langham who you had recently introduced to the project) which specifcally mentioned your concerns regarding placement of the breakpoint – this is why I decided to call a meeting to answer any further questions and detail the specifics of the design/location with you and your neighbours. Your input has been enormously important to this project and throughout the process you have provided invaluable assistance.

I have been knocking on the doors in Langham road and all residents i spoke to expressed the same view that they would like a ONE WAY system introduced in langham road as this will reduce the amount of accidents on parked cars. Langham Road is too narrow when cars are coming in both directions. I am calling on all residents to write on this bog and also direct to Joan Hancox to request that the council consider this. I have contacted Ms Hancox and waiting on formal reply. This table in Langham Road will not work so show your voice and speak up now. If we do not get a formal reply within the next couple of weeks I will be starting a petition. This is YOUR STREET so you should have an imput as to what is done! Contact me if you need help in writing your letter!

The consultation period and activities/workshops carried out over the past year have given residents ample opportunity to get involved and have their opinion heard. Many residents have been enormously involved over the past few months and played an active role in the redesign of the neighbourhood. I have posted considerable information on the blog regarding why it is expected that the features on Langham Road will have a significant impact on the speed of traffic – equally, I have gone into detail as to why a one way system would not be a suitable option. I am sorry that you did not take part in the consultation process over the past year, but – as I mentioned recently when I came to your house to update you on the project – all residents have had every opportunity to get involved. This project is not focused simply on Langham Road but on the whole neighbourhood. We have also made it clear that this project is not the ‘golden ticket’ to solving every issue overnight, but it will provide a cost effective and comprehensive foundation to changing how traffic moves through the area, and subsequently how residents feel about their neighbourhood.

Whether or not residents had the opportunity to get involved and to express their views is now irrelevent. The fact remains that residents are not happy with the current changes in Langham Road.I have spoken to many residents in Langham Road from the coffee shop till the bend and all residents state the same thing that they were unaware of previous meetings and certainly did not receive a chance to vote concerning the one way idea. I have formally requested under the freedom of information the details of all such meetings direct to Joan Hancox so until this is received I cannot comment as to how many people were actually involved in the consultation. Certainly the latest 21 day statutory notification issued 29th September to residents in langham road was NOT given out, Was NOT posted in the information board. the residents view and wishes are clear and therefore since we are going in circles I will wait for a formal reply from Ms Hancox after which i will be starting a petition which nearly every resident in my part of langham Road are willing to sign.